Slashdot Mirror
Slowing Wind Energy Production Suffers From Lack of Wind
HughPickens.com writes: Gregory Meyer reports at the Financial Times that electricity generated by U.S. wind farms fell 6 per cent in the first half of the year, even as the nation expanded wind generation capacity by 9 per cent. The reason was some of the softest air currents in 40 years, cutting power sales from wind farms to utilities. The situation is likely to intensify into the first quarter of 2016 as the El Niño weather phenomenon holds back wind speeds around much of the U.S. "We never anticipated a drop-off in the wind resource as we have witnessed over the past six months," says David Crane. Wind generated 4.4 per cent of US electricity last year, up from 0.4 per cent a decade earlier. But this year U.S. wind plants' "capacity factor" has averaged just a third of their total generating capacity, down from 38 per cent in 2014.
EIA noted that slightly slower wind speeds can reduce output by a disproportionately large amount. "Capacity factors for wind turbines are largely determined by wind resources," says a report from the Energy Information Administration. "Because the output from a turbine varies nonlinearly with wind speed, small decreases in wind speeds can result in much larger changes in output and, in turn, capacity factors." In January of 2015, wind speeds remained 20 to 45 percent below normal on areas of the west coast, but it was especially bad in California, Oregon, and Washington, where those levels dropped to 50 percent below normal during the month of January.
EIA noted that slightly slower wind speeds can reduce output by a disproportionately large amount. "Capacity factors for wind turbines are largely determined by wind resources," says a report from the Energy Information Administration. "Because the output from a turbine varies nonlinearly with wind speed, small decreases in wind speeds can result in much larger changes in output and, in turn, capacity factors." In January of 2015, wind speeds remained 20 to 45 percent below normal on areas of the west coast, but it was especially bad in California, Oregon, and Washington, where those levels dropped to 50 percent below normal during the month of January.
to replace reliable hydrocarbons or nuclear power
Who could have foreseen that wind power would be variable, even unpredictable?
Wind turbine power output is proportional to the third power of wind velocity. It only takes small changes in average wind velocity to effect large changes in turbine power output.
If only we had some way to warm the planet, so that there would be more wind. Perhaps by putting more CO2 in the air and letting the sun warm us up.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
No - we just hit peak wind faster than anyone expected.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Build up and put in the safer nuclear reactors we have nowadays...and supplement them with wind and solar.
There is no need to just have a monoculture when it comes to power.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Quick!
Tax something!
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
I don't think universe is that old, YMMV.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
It's almost like our ancestors gave up on wind power and build power stations for a reason....
It was said when these things went in that their claims of being able to be self supporting would not pan out. That they would need extensive subsidies forever and that they would need COAL or NATURAL GAS back ups to cover their load whenever they didn't provide the power.
All comments of this nature were treated like a naughty boy throwing spiders at the girls.
A sign of immaturity, anti social behavior, and really a good reason to have their fathers give them a stern talking to...
Because... when someone points out logical flaws in a power grid design, the best response is to address them like you're a kindergarten teacher and their attempts at rational dialogue are merely an expression of immaturity. Because after all... real adults... real mature and well adjusted people... they just immediately buy into whatever whomever the politician is that tells them what to believe. And anyone that doesn't some flavor of village idiot or deviant... probably a pedophile. Nothing screams pedophilia like questioning dodgy power and financial estimates of a wind farm.
So where is this going? Same place it went last time:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Am I against wind? Not at all. I think its great. I am against large amounts of public money going to build big wind farms in clusters. I'd prefer that the projects either be privately funded so it isn't just a scam to get grant money and then run when they project dries up. Or I'd like the money to instead be pushed to encourage home owners and building owners to install renewable power on their roofs and in their property thus negating the possibility that given companies are colluding or bribing the government to get contracts because the home owners will be under no obligation to buy from a given company.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
HVDC supergrids generate no power whatsoever. Now plug some nuclear reactors into that and then you'd really have something that could drive civilization and prosperity for mankind forward.
Yes! Let's tax those evil rich coal producers so we can give the money to those evil rich windmill makers!
This is what I don't get about those tax-n-subsidize proponents that want to subsidize things like wind, solar, and what not. The argument goes something like, "Those evil fossil fuel people are making money off the poor! They take our money and poison the planet! We need to make them pay!" Okay, so we tax them. What do we do with that tax income then?
I'll tell you where that money goes. We subsidize electric cars because they are so expensive. Yep, very expensive. So expensive that only a rich person can afford them even after the subsidies and car makers sell them at a loss. Who's getting those subsidies then? Yep, rich people that are looking for a four door penis enhancement and car makers that use that money to make more SUVs.
Solar subsidies? Same thing. Expensive solar panels are bought by rich people that want to feel good about themselves and then file for a tax rebate for doing so.
Windmills? We tax the evil corporations that make coal so that another evil corporation can afford to make windmills. With the complex structure of corporate ownership in this economy it's quite likely that those that own the coal company also own the windmill company.
This is not a problem that can be solved with taxes, as the parent post pointed out. This is a technology problem, and a policy problem. We'd have many more safe, reliable, and cheap nuclear power plants if only the government would get out of the way. One possible solution I see is taking nuclear regulation from the federal government and give it to the states. Let the states regulate their own nuclear power plants. The US Department of Energy is so fearful of dong anything wrong that they don't do anything at all.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
I can see why you are AC. You do not have a fucking clue of what you are saying. You think that America's taxes on oil and coal is creating artificially low prices? Oil prices are low because of fracking combined with every nation now dumping on the market so that they keep their % of the market regardless of prices.
And coal prices dropped because nat gas prices, along with WInd prices, are much lower than electricity from coal . In fact, the ONLY thing keeping it up to this price is that fact that we continue to increase coal to CHina.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.